LucasArts announced its latest videogame this week, Star Wars 1313, which pushes the franchise towards a more mature audience with its proposed 18-certificate rating.
The game - announced through Spike's Game Trailers TV Show last night - is said to be a third person action adventure set in a ruthless criminal underworld on the …

Star Wars

Yup

Re: Yup

I've never understood why people seem to think that selling a product, which you created because there's a demand, is somehow an evil thing.

Seriously - is ATI 'milking the cash cow' by continuing to make more and more video cards? Should they have stopped with the x1900pro because people liked it so much? How about Ferrari - they made one car people bought, but since then they've just been *milking the cash cow* by making all these different Ferraris! What bastards!

Sigh.

(Also - why are games in the Reg Hardware section? I mean, they're ware, but they're not *hard*. Well, except for Battletoads. That was freaking impossible.)

Re: Yup

The reason many of us believe that Lucasarse are milking the franchise is because, despite the potential, too many of the derivative games are quite simply themed crap, and they repeatedly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by issuing yet another Star Wars POS game. If they produced decent games (or mostly decent, even) there wouldn't be this carping.

To take your Ferrari example, imagine after the first few brillant models, they went downhill, and eventually the name ended up as just a trim badge on somebody else's cheap tin box. That's what we're talking about with the Star Wars gaming franchise, and the real world motoring example is Ghia. In the UK, people only now know of Ghia as a trim badge on a Ford Focus that indicates "I am elderly, infirm of mind, but have slightly more money than I know how to spend properly". Few have even considered that Ghia once designed and built fabulous cars themselves.

BTW, this car anorakery now justifies the original article in the Hardware section.

Re: Yup

Yeah, but you're describing would be terrible no matter whether the company made any money. It's not about the money, it's about the quality of the product. The cow really has nothing to do with it.

But, then again, if tons of people buy the stuff, it's obviously not a lousy product *to them*. And clearly, tons of people *are* buying it.

So that comes down to, "This company is making something I don't like". And why not? Because it doesn't meet the expectations created by the experience of the original. Basically my point: People don't like it because it's new. Sometimes it's really because it's crap, but a lot of the time it's really because it's new - and in either case, 'cash cow' really has nothing to do with it, since Lucas was milking that sucker the moment it hit theaters.

Just because you liked the way his hands felt on your udders then, but don't now, doesn't mean he wasn't milking the whole time.

Not really.

Back when Han shot first the sets were clean and sparse. And despite the arm on the floor, the bar fight was reasonably clean even by 70s standards, which were much cleaner than what we see these days - sort of what a friend once described to me as suburban white man graffiti. Even Empire wasn't gritty, just filmed mostly in dark shades but still clean.

The gritty crap was all CGI shite added when Lucas had the money to re-imagine the film. And don't get me started on the additional damage done by the Jabba the Hut scene. Sometimes great movies are great because of the constraints placed on them at the time they were made. In this case, Lucas focused much more on the story when he didn't have the money for the CGI.

Sounds like...

"I don't know. Fanwank something!"

"Star Wars 1313 dives into a part of the Star Wars mythos that we've always known existed, but never had a chance to visit"

I hate this kind of marketroid talk. It's not as if "Star Wars Universe" had some independent existence or (like mathematics or an actual world) had "areas to uncover/visit" because there is no requirement to be consistent in anything.

They should just admit that "We made random stuff up so we could sell you something. Enjoy!"

Re: "I don't know. Fanwank something!"

"They should just admit that "We made random stuff up so we could sell you something. Enjoy!""

That's pretty much all film, music, television, sports (whose premises are made up), games, and... well, anything else creative, by definition. I agree that it's marketing-speak, but if you're not allowed to use any in-context references for creative work, the whole world's gonna be full of things saying, "We made some shit! Try it!"

Granted, my web site (on which I have my own music) just says, "I write music, here it is", with links. But I'm kinda strange.